ABSTRACT
Objective: Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) has emerged as a potentially safe and convenient option for allergen immunotherapy for patients with inhalant allergy. Larger studies on the overall side effects and severe reactions anaphylaxis are still lacking. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting: Author's review was completed in the University of Texas Medical Branch. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials focusing on SLIT safety published from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2021, was conducted. Results: Twenty-six studies were included with analysis of 7827 patients, representing over 2.7 million SLIT doses. All studies focused on single-antigen immunotherapy. The mean duration of treatment was 11.54 months. Local side effects were present in 40.83% of patients [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.78-57.96]. Systemic side effects were encountered in 1.09% of SLIT patients (95% CI 0.57-1.78). Anaphylaxis was reported in 0.13% of patients (95% CI 0.06-0.22). Discontinuation rates due to side effects were low, at 4.32% of patients (95% CI 3.28-5.49). Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows that single-antigen SLIT is well-tolerated, with overall low rates of systemic side effects including anaphylaxis. Although there is a high rate of minor local side effect, the treatment attrition during the first year is low. With growing allergy burden worldwide, SLIT is a convenient and economically feasible option for immunotherapy. Further work is needed to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of single as well as multi-antigen SLIT, including quality of life assessments.
ABSTRACT
KEY POINTS: We analyzed social media posts on Facebook and Instagram discussing new rhinologic devices. Patient posts are a valuable source of patient perspective regarding rhinologic procedures. The majority of posts are by physicians giving information and advertising these new procedures.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Social media platforms are constantly evolving and expanding to new populations, exposing their users to various topics and serving as an informal educational resource. Medical ideas and topics are freely discussed online, making understanding of what is present on these platforms of particular importance to the practicing medical professional. In the field of otolaryngology, the public social media portrayal of sinus surgery has not been previously reported. METHODS: Social media posts using keywords related to sinus surgery on Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok were qualitatively analyzed and categorized based on media type, author, subject, timing, depiction, and popularity. RESULTS: The total number of posts included in final analysis was 1798, with a majority stemming from Instagram (68.5%), then Facebook (20.2%) and finally TikTok (11.3%). The most common type of media analyzed was images (69.0%) and patients were more often authors of posts (45.1%) as compared to physicians (34.8%). The subjects of the posts were nearly equally reassurance regarding surgery (41.3%) and educational or informational posts (38.8%) and were most commonly timed in the postoperative period (41.3%). Sinus surgery was depicted in a positive fashion most frequently (56.6%), notably compared against the negative portrayal at 3.2%. Negative posts most commonly cited postoperative pain or bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Most social media posts analyzed in this multi-platform study depicted sinus surgery in a positive fashion. Patients tended to post in the postoperative or perioperative period, whereas physicians tender to post intraoperative educational posts. Negative posts were most commonly centered around postoperative pain. Cautious interpretation of these results could be used for improving patient care and outreach in the digital age.
